If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Rec.photo** hijack
Be aware that there is an effort by Alan Browne and several others of
this newsgroup to create four new rec.photo** newsgroups. Creation of these groups will kill this group. Worst of all, the charter of this NG will not be affected if any of these new groups are passed, which means that this group will abandoned by the talented folks. Alan Browne is on record for wanting a charter change for this newsgroup. Russ Allmighty of news.groups declared that charter amendments are not possible, so this is Alan and his gang's way of creating a safety zone for the elite. Please do not fall for this line of subterfuge. It is a crock. Guy Macon |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Some paranoia coming from Google? The only news group creation I have
seen is for digital imaging. Those of us who still use 35 mm gear will continue to post here. Perhaps it might become as sparse as the medium format or large format groups, but I see nothing wrong with that. You will not be seeing my posts on any digital equipment groups. Just a curiosity, though you must be a lurker. . . . . . . . Perhaps you could reply about which posts, or posters, you have found useful, that you believe might disappear. Why not ask those people directly through this group? I post because I welcome the chance to help others, when possible. I also read many posts, because none of us can know too much. Ciao! Gordon Moat A G Studio http://www.allgstudio.com Updated! |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Gordon Moat wrote:
Some paranoia coming from Google? The only news group creation I have seen is for digital imaging. Those of us who still use 35 mm gear will continue to post here. Perhaps it might become as sparse as the medium format or large format groups, but I see nothing wrong with that. You will not be seeing my posts on any digital equipment groups. I post because I welcome the chance to help others, when possible. I also read many posts, because none of us can know too much. You are one of the good posters still left here, Gordon. Seems like there are far fewer than there once were. Are you sick of DSLR stuff posted here? Personally I'm not, but I can understand how others would be sick of the Shoot-In and/or DSLRs. Talk about overkill! In RFD #4 the four new groups would be rec.photo.digital.slr-systems rec.photo.digital.zlr rec.photo.digital.point+shoot rec.photo.digital.rangefinder |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Bill Tuthill wrote:
Gordon Moat wrote: Some paranoia coming from Google? The only news group creation I have seen is for digital imaging. Those of us who still use 35 mm gear will continue to post here. Perhaps it might become as sparse as the medium format or large format groups, but I see nothing wrong with that. You will not be seeing my posts on any digital equipment groups. I post because I welcome the chance to help others, when possible. I also read many posts, because none of us can know too much. You are one of the good posters still left here, Gordon. Seems like there are far fewer than there once were. Are you sick of DSLR stuff posted here? Personally I'm not, but I can understand how others would be sick of the Shoot-In and/or DSLRs. Talk about overkill! In RFD #4 the four new groups would be rec.photo.digital.slr-systems rec.photo.digital.zlr rec.photo.digital.point+shoot rec.photo.digital.rangefinder The original post is a forgery of a regular in news.groups, which manages the *creation* of new charters for big 8 NGs. Written probably by someone who wants to keep putting flies in the ointment and, among many agendas, change the charters of this group and rec.photo.digital. There's a very long history- all within the last few weeks!- of why the names, why the multiple groups, etc. are being proposed in the FRD's being posted in news.groups and in r.p.d. It now is clearer than ever, that changes to an existing charter cannot be done, so perhaps over time those who keep trying to force that will find other opportunites to promote change. -- John McWilliams |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
John McWilliams wrote:
Bill Tuthill wrote: Gordon Moat wrote: Some paranoia coming from Google? The only news group creation I have seen is for digital imaging. Those of us who still use 35 mm gear will continue to post here. Perhaps it might become as sparse as the medium format or large format groups, but I see nothing wrong with that. You will not be seeing my posts on any digital equipment groups. I post because I welcome the chance to help others, when possible. I also read many posts, because none of us can know too much. You are one of the good posters still left here, Gordon. Seems like there are far fewer than there once were. Are you sick of DSLR stuff posted here? Personally I'm not, but I can understand how others would be sick of the Shoot-In and/or DSLRs. Talk about overkill! In RFD #4 the four new groups would be rec.photo.digital.slr-systems rec.photo.digital.zlr rec.photo.digital.point+shoot rec.photo.digital.rangefinder The original post is a forgery of a regular in news.groups, which manages the *creation* of new charters for big 8 NGs. Written probably by someone who wants to keep putting flies in the ointment and, among many agendas, change the charters of this group and rec.photo.digital. Okay, that makes more sense. There's a very long history- all within the last few weeks!- of why the names, why the multiple groups, etc. are being proposed in the FRD's being posted in news.groups and in r.p.d. There is a large group of Usenet individuals whose primary enjoyment is disrupting as many groups as possible. Almost all use anonymous remailers, and some are into very questionable, or even illegal, internet practices. Many of them like to go after the more popular news groups. There are a few individuals like these who use real e-mail addresses, like Steve Young, though none of these individuals has any interest in photography, and I doubt any of them even own a camera. This is the nature of Usenet, so I would expect nothing less. People will not get along with each other, nor respect others, when they feel there is little chance of repercussions. It now is clearer than ever, that changes to an existing charter cannot be done, so perhaps over time those who keep trying to force that will find other opportunites to promote change. -- John McWilliams I don't mind at all if a rec.photo.digital.slr group is created. I think it would be a great place for many of those interested individuals to go, and to leave r.p.e.35mm largely absent of direct digital SLR discussions. I have no interest in participating in any digital news groups. Ciao! Gordon Moat A G Studio http://www.allgstudio.com Updated! |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Gordon Moat wrote:
I don't mind at all if a rec.photo.digital.slr group is created. I think it would be a great place for many of those interested individuals to go, and to leave r.p.e.35mm largely absent of direct digital SLR discussions. I have no interest in participating in any digital news groups. Of course r.p.d.slr makes sense, which is why I was surprised by RFD #4. Also you are correct that most digicam owners don't understand the term ZLR, let alone Rangefinder! It might also make sense for the Shoot-In to move to a less-active group such as rec.photo.technique. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
John McWilliams wrote:
Bill Tuthill wrote: Gordon Moat wrote: Some paranoia coming from Google? The only news group creation I have seen is for digital imaging. Those of us who still use 35 mm gear will continue to post here. Perhaps it might become as sparse as the medium format or large format groups, but I see nothing wrong with that. You will not be seeing my posts on any digital equipment groups. I post because I welcome the chance to help others, when possible. I also read many posts, because none of us can know too much. You are one of the good posters still left here, Gordon. Seems like there are far fewer than there once were. Are you sick of DSLR stuff posted here? Personally I'm not, but I can understand how others would be sick of the Shoot-In and/or DSLRs. Talk about overkill! In RFD #4 the four new groups would be rec.photo.digital.slr-systems rec.photo.digital.zlr rec.photo.digital.point+shoot rec.photo.digital.rangefinder The original post is a forgery of a regular in news.groups, which manages the *creation* of new charters for big 8 NGs. Written probably by someone who wants to keep putting flies in the ointment and, among many agendas, change the charters of this group and rec.photo.digital. Okay, that makes more sense. There's a very long history- all within the last few weeks!- of why the names, why the multiple groups, etc. are being proposed in the FRD's being posted in news.groups and in r.p.d. There is a large group of Usenet individuals whose primary enjoyment is disrupting as many groups as possible. Almost all use anonymous remailers, and some are into very questionable, or even illegal, internet practices. Many of them like to go after the more popular news groups. There are a few individuals like these who use real e-mail addresses, like Steve Young, though none of these individuals has any interest in photography, and I doubt any of them even own a camera. This is the nature of Usenet, so I would expect nothing less. People will not get along with each other, nor respect others, when they feel there is little chance of repercussions. It now is clearer than ever, that changes to an existing charter cannot be done, so perhaps over time those who keep trying to force that will find other opportunites to promote change. -- John McWilliams I don't mind at all if a rec.photo.digital.slr group is created. I think it would be a great place for many of those interested individuals to go, and to leave r.p.e.35mm largely absent of direct digital SLR discussions. I have no interest in participating in any digital news groups. Ciao! Gordon Moat A G Studio http://www.allgstudio.com Updated! |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
John McWilliams wrote:
Bill Tuthill wrote: Gordon Moat wrote: Some paranoia coming from Google? The only news group creation I have seen is for digital imaging. Those of us who still use 35 mm gear will continue to post here. Perhaps it might become as sparse as the medium format or large format groups, but I see nothing wrong with that. You will not be seeing my posts on any digital equipment groups. I post because I welcome the chance to help others, when possible. I also read many posts, because none of us can know too much. You are one of the good posters still left here, Gordon. Seems like there are far fewer than there once were. Are you sick of DSLR stuff posted here? Personally I'm not, but I can understand how others would be sick of the Shoot-In and/or DSLRs. Talk about overkill! In RFD #4 the four new groups would be rec.photo.digital.slr-systems rec.photo.digital.zlr rec.photo.digital.point+shoot rec.photo.digital.rangefinder The original post is a forgery of a regular in news.groups, which manages the *creation* of new charters for big 8 NGs. Written probably by someone who wants to keep putting flies in the ointment and, among many agendas, change the charters of this group and rec.photo.digital. Okay, that makes more sense. There's a very long history- all within the last few weeks!- of why the names, why the multiple groups, etc. are being proposed in the FRD's being posted in news.groups and in r.p.d. There is a large group of Usenet individuals whose primary enjoyment is disrupting as many groups as possible. Almost all use anonymous remailers, and some are into very questionable, or even illegal, internet practices. Many of them like to go after the more popular news groups. There are a few individuals like these who use real e-mail addresses, like Steve Young, though none of these individuals has any interest in photography, and I doubt any of them even own a camera. This is the nature of Usenet, so I would expect nothing less. People will not get along with each other, nor respect others, when they feel there is little chance of repercussions. It now is clearer than ever, that changes to an existing charter cannot be done, so perhaps over time those who keep trying to force that will find other opportunites to promote change. -- John McWilliams I don't mind at all if a rec.photo.digital.slr group is created. I think it would be a great place for many of those interested individuals to go, and to leave r.p.e.35mm largely absent of direct digital SLR discussions. I have no interest in participating in any digital news groups. Ciao! Gordon Moat A G Studio http://www.allgstudio.com Updated! |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
In article ,
Bill Tuthill writes: Talk about overkill! In RFD #4 the four new groups would be rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Why the 'systems' bit? rec.photo.digital.zlr What is a zlr? rec.photo.digital.point+shoot Quite a few. rec.photo.digital.rangefinder That Epson thing and none else? -- http://www.petezilla.co.uk |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"Peter Chant" wrote in message
... In article , Bill Tuthill writes: Talk about overkill! In RFD #4 the four new groups would be rec.photo.digital.slr-systems Why the 'systems' bit? rec.photo.digital.zlr What is a zlr? rec.photo.digital.point+shoot Quite a few. rec.photo.digital.rangefinder That Epson thing and none else? -- http://www.petezilla.co.uk ZLR=Zoom Lens Reflex, like the Olympus E-10/20. -- Skip Middleton http://www.shadowcatcherimagery.com |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Rec.photo** Hijacking | Guy Macon | Digital Photography | 114 | September 12th 04 07:59 PM |